According to: Gabor Kiss
George Eddy writes : From eddy@ISI.EDU Thu Feb 22 22:12:26 1996 Date: Thu, 22 Feb 96 13:07:22 PST Posted-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 96 13:07:22 PST Message-Id: <9602222107.AA16189@kit.isi.edu> From: George Eddy <eddy@ISI.EDU> To: rps@ISI.EDU Subject: Internet Draft Submission
Geographic Location Extension to Ripe-181
3.2 Direct and Indirect Location
This method proposes the addition of a ``location'' attribute to the aut-num as in 3.1. This attribute could directly hold the LocString, or the name of a ``location'' object. The location object could be defined as:
location: [mandatory] [single] loc-string: [mandatory] [single] descr: [optional] [multiple] notify: [optional] [multiple] mnt-by: [optional] [multiple] changed: [mandatory] [multiple] source: [mandatory] [single]
Using the example in section 3.1, we would have the following:
aut-num: AS8800 location: IrvineCA ...
and the object ``IrvineCA'' would be:
location: IrvineCA loc-string: 33 40 10n 117 49 20w 10m descr: Example location object in Irvine, CA. notify: eddy@isi.edu mnt-by: MAINT-EXAMPLE changed: eddy@isi.edu 960220 source: EXAMPLE
The loc-name could be any string desired by the creator.
Dear Eddy,
Can two or more AS-es share the same location object?
How to coordinate the loc-name assignments. In Europe tipically there are more then one AS within the same city. They will race for the simple name of the city. Just like for domain names. :-/
Maybe the RIPE predefine location objects for the main cities.
Hello Gabor, Yes, it is entirely possible for multiple ASs to use a location object. Of course it's definition and modification would be subject to normal database access restrictions. As matter of fact, reusing the location object is one of the benifiets of using the "indrect" method in the document. Since many objects such as "IrvineCA" or "London" have what could be considered correct values, that is, a specific location on the wgs84 reference, they would (should) not be subject to "I got Stockholm first" type of problems like domain names. What this means in terms of a mapping tool, is that multiple icons could rest on the same location. in this case it is up to the tool/user to make sense of the clutter. Perhaps a less restrictive maintainer could be used to collect location objects. or it may not be a bad idea if a volunteer collected and established locations objects for the use of others. I hope that cleared things up some, please let me know if it didn't.
Regards
Gabor
cheers, -- - rusty eddy@isi.edu